The weirdest part is it says Epstein was "found unresponsive in his cell and pronounced dead shortly thereafter." That just doesn't seem like the words you'd use to describe a hanging suicide. (Would you really write that the dangling body was "found unresponsive...")
The fine article just says that the statement was "dated" the day before Epstein's death. Well, dated how? By a machine timestamp, or by a hand-entered date at the top of it?
The easiest way to have this happen is to have a human type the date, and have them make a mistake. (Ever put the wrong date on a check?) But there's not enough info in the article to know if that's a possibility here.
And there's plenty of reason to think it was something other than suicide. Two checks in a row got skipped, and two cameras malfunctioned, all in the same night? And someone mistyped the date on the statement? All just coincidence? That seems... improbable.
So, while I can see that there could be an innocent explanation, I'm not convinced that there is one.
6 comments
[ 33.3 ms ] story [ 667 ms ] threadWhat says that? I don't see the document linked to in that article at all. The article seems to essentially be spam.
The easiest way to have this happen is to have a human type the date, and have them make a mistake. (Ever put the wrong date on a check?) But there's not enough info in the article to know if that's a possibility here.
And there's plenty of reason to think it was something other than suicide. Two checks in a row got skipped, and two cameras malfunctioned, all in the same night? And someone mistyped the date on the statement? All just coincidence? That seems... improbable.
So, while I can see that there could be an innocent explanation, I'm not convinced that there is one.
That said, in this case you can just check yourself.